9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellant is that instead of giving reference of the debit entries in the cenvat account, they have given reference to the TR6 challan through which payment was made in cash towards duty liability in October 2010. This is only a procedural lapse and there is no excess availments of credit, therefore the appellant have re-credited the amount whatever was eligible to them - appeal allowed - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the cash payment is not correct and accordingly the re-credit was denied. 2. Ms. Anjali Hirawat, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the only error made by the appellant is that they have given reference to the challan of cash deposit made during the month of May and June 2014. However in any case, since in the month of October 2010 duty was debited through cenvat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant Commissioner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. I find that the appellant have re-credited the amount equal to the cenvat credit utilized during the month of October 2010 on the ground that they have paid the same amount in cash as per the Tribunal s order No. A/370/1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-credit of the amount equal to the cenvat credit utilized during the month of October 2010. The only lapse on the part of the appellant is that instead of giving reference of the debit entries in the cenvat account, they have given reference to the TR6 challan through which payment was made in cash towards duty liability in October 2010. This is only a procedural lapse and there is no excess avai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
